Subj : Z1_REC
To   : Carl Austin Bennett
From : Bob Seaborn
Date : Tue Apr 17 2001 05:54 am

 >BS> First of all, you do NOT have permission from me to make reference to
 >BS> 1:140/1, REC17, or for that matter, ANY net in region 17, since you
 >BS> do not have specific permission from either RC17, REC17, or the NC of
 >BS> the net in question.  Accordingly, please remove ANY and All
 >BS> reference to 1:140/1, REC17, or the R17 nets until you do have such
 >BS> permission in verified writing.
 >
 > Does this mean that you are not a valid inbound route for ERN destined
 > to the REC12 system or its downlinks?

      It means that you should consult either the ROUTELST.* that the ZEC1
issues weekly or the ROUTELST.R17 that the REC17 produces to answer your 
questions.  NO other document is acceptable, or to be considered accurate.

 >
 > I've had the routes 379/1 <-> REC12 and REC17 <-> REC12 reported to me
 > but had had some misgivings at the time about using the latter due to
 > the current political games being played. Is REC17 <-> REC12 a valid
 > route or is it bogus?

      140/1 sends 163/133 any traffic that he has agreed to accept inbound
routing for.  140/1 accepts inbound routing for any nodelisted node, worldwide.

      What you choose to do is entirely up to you!


 >
 >BS> Secondly, the Z1_REC fileecho was founded by myself on behalf of the
 >BS> REC's of zone 1, and the ONLY hatch permissions granted were for each
 >BS> REC to hatch out his regional routing chart.  Nothing more!
 >
 > This is interesting... you are completely incapable of grasping the
 > concept that REG12 is a restricted administrative echo and allow out-
 > of-region sysops to post, yet you lambaste REC12 for hatching a route
 > list into Z1_REC.

      I accept the fact that I was told by a former REC12 that REG12 was
available to anyone who wished it, no restrictions.  I accept the fact that 
NOBODY instructed me differently when the former REC12 dropped out.  I accept 
the fact that up until last week there was NO elist entry for REG12 to check 
with.  I accept the fact that I have never seen any rules posted for REG12. Now 
that you, as RC12, elisted the echotag, and have stated your position, the 
limits on REG12 changed, it would have been nice if you had a quiet discussion, 
instead of turning it into a political statement, but whatever, it's your echo, 
you do what you wish.

 >
 > Something doesn't quite mesh here, Bob!

      Sure does, the requirements for Z1_REC were put into place day one, and
haven't changed since.  The requirements for REG12 changed last week.

 >
 >BS> Only the ZEC1 has the authority to hatch the zone 1 routing chart in
 >BS> Z1_REC, therefore it is incumbent upon you, or those that you are
 >BS> fronting for, to supply the ZEC1 with files that you wish hatched in
 >BS> Z1_REC, and to NOT hatch anything other than your own regional
 >BS> routing chart.
 >
 > If Z1_REC were a moderated echo (and restricted echo isn't enough as
 > REC12 has the right to be there) may I ask where a copy of the .RUL file
 > can be found?

      Better learn something, Z1_REC is NOT a message echo, it's a fileecho.
You are NOT a REC, therefor you have no rights to be involved in it.  Some day 
you may understand how to move mail and files.


--- GEcho/32 & IM 2.50
 * Origin: http://www.nwstar.com (1:140/12)

.